tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4155421424596088152.comments2012-09-13T08:46:05.153+01:00Homeopathy Safe MedicineSteven Scruttonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07586527068970842573noreply@blogger.comBlogger1578125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4155421424596088152.post-59727043494577858302012-09-11T22:29:20.527+01:002012-09-11T22:29:20.527+01:00Thanks for the response, even though I am uncertai...Thanks for the response, even though I am uncertain about how it relates to the blog. <br /><br />I see no evidence here that shows Homeopathy is not a safe, effective medical therapy.<br /><br />Unless you, and other Homeopathy Denialists are able to address the issue, the issue raised by the blog, and provide me with the evidence I have asked for, please don&#39;t bother wasting my time again.Steve Scruttonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07586527068970842573noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4155421424596088152.post-27491871987777646982012-09-11T16:35:33.985+01:002012-09-11T16:35:33.985+01:00Steve - there is much to comment on about your pos...Steve - there is much to comment on about your post here. But I think there is a central confusion. You are being asked to describe the sort of evidence that would change your mind and you have not really done so.<br /><br />Let&#39;s keep this focused and simple: what kind of evidence would you imagine would convince you on your final point? What document, statement or other form of evidence would convince you that I am not a paid pharma shill?<br /><br />If you cannot imagine the style of evidence that would convince you, then perhaps your mind is closed to the possibility that you could be wrong.<br /><br />The same goes for all other points.Le Canard Noirhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07565056022495154803noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4155421424596088152.post-52019078271251874002012-09-11T11:57:30.802+01:002012-09-11T11:57:30.802+01:00I think this is an excellent question, but rather ...I think this is an excellent question, but rather than answer it here, I will write a new blog on just this issue.Steve Scruttonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07586527068970842573noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4155421424596088152.post-60435962541278088672012-09-04T10:47:30.798+01:002012-09-04T10:47:30.798+01:00Steve, could I ask politely for you to answer a si...Steve, could I ask politely for you to answer a simple question: What evidence would YOU be prepared to accept that homeopathy does not have any medical efficacy? What level of evidence will change your mind?<br /><br />Note: In answering this question, please don&#39;t sidetrack your reply by railing against denialists, skeptics and Big Pharma, etc - we know you hate them and we know you think they are evil, and so on. The question is asked of YOU and YOUR beliefs.<br /><br />Would you be so kind? Thank you.Zephttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05437239597878491108noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4155421424596088152.post-35980145155995340272012-09-04T09:13:43.320+01:002012-09-04T09:13:43.320+01:00&#39;Second Invigilator&#39; believes that I am ig...&#39;Second Invigilator&#39; believes that I am ignoring his comments, and he is quite correct. The thing about Denialists is not just that they attack Homeopathy, but that they seek to waste time with non-ending argument argument. So, despite answering his questions, be comes back with the same question stating that his question has not been answered.<br /><br />Please note two things. No-one has responded to the subject of this blog - that Denialists have not argument other than denial, and no evidence to support their denials - and that as an result they resort to bad language and abuse.<br /><br />Moreover, I am refusing, and will continue to refuse, to respond to the kind of patronising insults made by &#39;Second Invigilator&#39; in the posts he is now sending. He is now threatening me with &#39;telling his friends&#39; I am not publishing his comments! Gripes, I feel really threatened!<br /><br />I will, perhaps, write another blog using the kind of sneering insults used by Denialists which have no substance supporting them other than the prejudice that supports all Denialist activity.<br /><br />In future, I will make a point that comments to any blog will need (i) to relate to the subject matter of the blog, and (ii) to be conducted without implied insults.Steve Scruttonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07586527068970842573noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4155421424596088152.post-68333469749414355322012-09-04T08:41:32.354+01:002012-09-04T08:41:32.354+01:00No evidence? That is because you ignore any &#39;e...No evidence? That is because you ignore any &#39;evidence&#39; placed before you. Homeopathy has been treating Whooping Cough, successfully, for over 200 years.Steve Scruttonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07586527068970842573noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4155421424596088152.post-72121063001955589142012-08-31T07:45:45.499+01:002012-08-31T07:45:45.499+01:00Steve
Please could you get round to publishing th...Steve<br /><br />Please could you get round to publishing the two posts I made yesterday afternoon so we can advance this discussion at something more than a snail&#39;s pace.Second Invigilatorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15500894858180509385noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4155421424596088152.post-74341771109422495512012-08-30T18:45:24.643+01:002012-08-30T18:45:24.643+01:00@Steve,
&quot;And what is this from jdc? More den...@Steve,<br /><br />&quot;And what is this from jdc? More denials! The evidence is just not good enough - as it rarely is for denialists. &#39;There is no evidence&#39; they say; but then, when evidence is presented, &#39;it simply does not exist&#39;. Pure, unadulterated denialism.&quot;<br />I haven&#39;t simply denied that the evidence exists, I&#39;ve pointed out why your links do not constitute evidence in support of your claims. (1) They misinterpret the information regarding the percentage of those with pertussis who have been vaccinated - they cannot be cited as evidence in support of any claim that the vaccinated are more likely to get the disease because that is precisely the opposite of what the research they are discussing shows. The proportion of those who are vaccinated is higher than the proportion of people with pertussis who were vaccinated. (2) They do not even address the question of severity of symptoms - which as I have pointed out (with citations) are worse in those who are unvaccinated. In short: you have still not posted any evidence that actually supports your claims and I have explained why the links you have posted do not constitute such evidence. I have also provided evidence that contradicts your claims but it seems you prefer not to address that evidence.<br /><br />&quot;Actually, it would be quite easy to find out how many vaccinated children contracted the disease, but it is not done because those who would have to gather the evidence would not like the answers.&quot;<br />Erm, the research has been done. The research is not only out there - some of it has been misinterpreted by Natural News in an article which you linked to yourself. You are denying the existence of information that is the basis of an article you link to.<br /><br />&quot;If only you knew how easy it is to treat these diseases with Homeopathy!&quot;<br />An extraordinary claim, and yet one not supported by extraordinary evidence. In fact, it is a claim not supported even by ordinary evidence in the form of well-conducted trials.jdchttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15142879187467119116noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4155421424596088152.post-87375721315894262532012-08-30T15:03:00.500+01:002012-08-30T15:03:00.500+01:00I am not here to answer arrogant questions from yo...I am not here to answer arrogant questions from yourself. I care little whether you consider Homeopaths to be &#39;health professionals&#39;. I do care that my patients trust me, and benefit from homeopathic treatment.<br /><br />I do consider ConMed to he harmful, including its treatment of Malaria. My opinion is shared by an increasing number of people owing to the continuous and ongoing failure of conventional drug-based treatment. I therefore reserve my right, and the right of every other person, to refuse such treatment, and use the treatment of his/her choice.<br /><br />Strategies for preventing mosquito bites are standard, and apply to both conventional and homeopathic practitioners.<br /><br /> Steve Scruttonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07586527068970842573noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4155421424596088152.post-78020123999662280002012-08-30T14:54:58.431+01:002012-08-30T14:54:58.431+01:00Correct.Correct.Steve Scruttonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07586527068970842573noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4155421424596088152.post-90895509313260928152012-08-30T14:43:10.962+01:002012-08-30T14:43:10.962+01:00I note that the ARH blog, to which I linked, and i...I note that the ARH blog, to which I linked, and in which you have replied still has its comments closed. <br /><br />&quot;Comments on this blog are restricted to team members. &quot;<br /> <br />Second Invigilatorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15500894858180509385noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4155421424596088152.post-34495098252650659452012-08-30T14:39:58.138+01:002012-08-30T14:39:58.138+01:00Steve
You appear to have answered a question that...Steve<br /><br />You appear to have answered a question that you presumably prefer to the one that was asked. You wish to regard yourself as a &#39;health professional&#39;. From a health professional, I would expect a clear and specific answer.<br /><br />You evidently do not like conventional medicine and think it is harmful. You regard homeopathy as efficacious.<br /><br />Therefore, will you state categorically that homeopathy can and should be used instead of conventional medicine for prophylaxis of malaria?<br /><br />This is capable of a yes/no answer. If you say no, then, as a homeopath, please explain why it should not be used as prophylaxis of malaria.<br /><br />If you are taking a homeopathic remedy to prevent malaria, does that mean you can ignore all strategies (mosquito nets etc) to avoid getting bitten?<br /><br />If homeopathy works, as you believe it does, then what role do bite-prevention strategies have in the prevention of malaria? They would be redundant.Second Invigilatorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15500894858180509385noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4155421424596088152.post-56168145764519131922012-08-30T12:17:47.842+01:002012-08-30T12:17:47.842+01:00What an absurd little guy! He sent another email -...What an absurd little guy! He sent another email - I have marked it as &#39;spam&#39;. Perhaps he will now go away, and realise that he has nothing to say, but perhaps that is wishful thinking!Steve Scruttonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07586527068970842573noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4155421424596088152.post-32973434477502203802012-08-30T12:07:40.262+01:002012-08-30T12:07:40.262+01:00I think that we should be free to choose to travel...I think that we should be free to choose to travel by magic carpet. It is part of my transport freedom. Gravity is only a theory, science does not know how it works so cannot prove that flying carpets don&#39;t work.Guyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01796733036727025970noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4155421424596088152.post-18702418768512380282012-08-30T11:22:54.446+01:002012-08-30T11:22:54.446+01:00I believe that anyone who wants to avail themselve...I believe that anyone who wants to avail themselves of Homeopathic protections should be able to do so. It is a matter of Patient Choice.<br /><br />I cannot imagine why anyone, taking conventional drugs or homeopathic remedies, should not avail themselves of normal protective strategies.<br />Steve Scruttonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07586527068970842573noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4155421424596088152.post-64154653057657916692012-08-29T21:45:58.831+01:002012-08-29T21:45:58.831+01:00Pausing only to note that your repetition of the p...Pausing only to note that your repetition of the phrase &quot;merdering fucktard quack&quot; has considerably boosted its Googlejuice, I would ask why someone who insists he is a &#39;health professional&#39;, although the ASA thinks otherwise, has not seen fit to answer a post that has been sat on the ARH blog unanswered since 13th Dec 2011;<br /><br />&quot;&quot;The time when spokespersons can go on television and say that homeopathic prophylaxis is not recommended has to come to an end.&quot;<br /><br />Please clarify. Do you state categorically that homeopathy can and should be used instead of conventional medicine for prophylaxis of malaria?<br /><br />If you are taking a homeopathic remedy to prevent malaria, does that mean you can ignore all strategies (mosquito nets etc) to avoid getting bitten?&quot;<br /><br />http://arh.blogspot.co.uk/2011/10/are-homeopaths-health-professionals-in.html<br /><br />I am sure someone who is not a &quot;merdering fucktard quack&quot; will be happy to give clear and specific answers to those questions.Second Invigilatorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15500894858180509385noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4155421424596088152.post-17979942807835162892012-08-29T15:31:45.142+01:002012-08-29T15:31:45.142+01:00And what is this from jdc? More denials! The evide...And what is this from jdc? More denials! The evidence is just not good enough - as it rarely is for denialists. &#39;There is no evidence&#39; they say; but then, when evidence is presented, &#39;it simply does not exist&#39;. Pure, unadulterated denialism. Actually, it would be quite easy to find out how many vaccinated children contracted the disease, but it is not done because those who would have to gather the evidence would not like the answers.<br /><br />If only you knew how easy it is to treat these diseases with Homeopathy!Steve Scruttonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07586527068970842573noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4155421424596088152.post-40825886840370531712012-08-29T15:25:51.248+01:002012-08-29T15:25:51.248+01:00Pleasure!Pleasure!Steve Scruttonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07586527068970842573noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4155421424596088152.post-49671567141931867582012-08-29T15:25:18.130+01:002012-08-29T15:25:18.130+01:00The &#39;Guy&#39; is the guy who called me a &#39;...The &#39;Guy&#39; is the guy who called me a &#39;profiteering quack&#39;, and a &#39;merdering fucktard quack&#39; (see Blog above). The quality of his argument is about the same as the quality of his language! I have always found it an interesting argument - that parents should give their children a dangerous vaccine, to protect them from a disease; and then, when they get the disease, to blame it on those who did not get the vaccination. Better to rely on Homeopathy, methinks.<br />Steve Scruttonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07586527068970842573noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4155421424596088152.post-23677819936976481732012-08-29T15:24:27.755+01:002012-08-29T15:24:27.755+01:00Colin - so very reasonable! And you don&#39;t even...Colin - so very reasonable! And you don&#39;t even resort to the language of your denialist colleagues. But nice as your story is, it is pure denialism. Is all studies showed Homeopathy to be &#39;no better than placebo&#39; you might be right. But most studies show Homeopathy outperforms placebo, certainly outperforms comparisons with Big Pharma drugs. So you have to ignore this evidence.<br /><br />Above all, you have to ignore the evidence of people who use Homeopathy for their illness, and are cured. One man I saw recently had Sebacious Cysts all over his head. He has had them for 50 years or so. He has had every treatment ConMed could offer, including an operation. Nothing worked. His wife came to see me recently as she could not believe what Homeopathy had done to her husband. I am now treating her for a condition she has had for the last 30 years.<br /><br />I suppose these examples will be dismissed, by you and your denialist colleagues, as &#39;anecdotal&#39;. I suppose it will be put down to spontaneous remission. Or perhaps (as I have been told before) they are just mistaken! I don&#39;t envy your task, denying the amazing power of Homeopathy must be a trial for you, having to ignore so much of what is happening in front of your eyes.<br /><br />So keep your eyes tight closed!Steve Scruttonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07586527068970842573noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4155421424596088152.post-73321010763129332442012-08-25T17:48:00.867+01:002012-08-25T17:48:00.867+01:00Steve,
Thank you for your reply to my comment.
T...Steve,<br /><br />Thank you for your reply to my comment.<br /><br />The three links you provide are to opinion pieces and do not constitute evidence in support of your claims that &quot;vaccinated children fare worse than the unvaccinated, and that the vaccinated who get the disease get it far worse&quot;. None of them demonstrate that attack rates are higher in those who are vaccinated and none of them even address the question of whether symptoms are more severe in those who are vaccinated.<br /><br />The Natural News piece points out that a high percentage of those who contract pertussis have been vaccinated. This is true - but it ignores the fact that a high percentage of people have been vaccinated. The proportion of those vaccinated is in fact higher than the proportion of those with pertussis who have been vaccinated. This means that those who are vaccinated are less likely to contract pertussis.<br /><br />There is an acknowledged problem with waning immunity from pertussis vaccination but those who are vaccinated are still less likely to contract the disease and those who do have less severe symptoms.<br /><br />I&#39;m afraid that the &quot;growing evidence&quot; to which you refer simply does not exist.jdchttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15142879187467119116noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4155421424596088152.post-70556357778688931782012-08-23T09:38:44.625+01:002012-08-23T09:38:44.625+01:00This comment has been removed by the author.Steve Scruttonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07586527068970842573noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4155421424596088152.post-2894820949091280012012-08-23T01:38:25.897+01:002012-08-23T01:38:25.897+01:00thanks for sharing.thanks for sharing<a href="http://www.daai007.org/" title="徵信社" rel="nofollow">.</a><br />cityhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05583017738947703614noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4155421424596088152.post-39297876435127879832012-08-22T10:15:03.562+01:002012-08-22T10:15:03.562+01:00Steve you don&#39;t seem to understand what a deni...Steve you don&#39;t seem to understand what a denialist is. <br /><br />Imagine somebody that helped people by playing the piano. This goes on for years, people listen to the music and often feel better, every now and again somebody with a serious illness will get better - breast cancer say. <br /><br />Then a scientist does a well designed trial of the piano playing and the results are &#39;no better than placebo&#39;. The pianist rejects it - its just one study and rationalises it away; after all it&#39;s his business that is going to be affected. <br /><br />Then over the years thousands of studies are done - and an interesting phenomenon emerges - the efficacy results of the piano treatment correlate to the quality of the studies with the best studies saying &#39;no better than placebo&#39; - meta analysis and reviews agree. <br /><br />The pianist still refuses to accept this now good minimally subjective evidence - arguing that his treatment is not suitable for such trials because it all very personal. <br /><br />He is now in denial - the best minimally subjective evidence says one thing and because of his bias (and business) he is rejecting it. He resolves the dissonance with rationalisations and carries on.<br /><br />This is exactly where homeopathy is. Forget &#39;it cannot work&#39; arguments - they are irrelevant - it does not work (more than placebo) as evidence by clinical studies. <br /><br />Homeopaths are in denial - which is very human - there is business at stake. But if you keep it up you will flounder in time. Maybe i&#39;s too late, but there are ways to strategise - there is some evidence that overt placebo works - you could go down that road and only &#39;treat&#39; self limiting or cyclic chronic illness. i.e. be intellectually honest, embrace the good evidence and say OK - homeopathy is placebo but overt ritual placebo can still work in some contexts. The skeptics are not in denial - they are just following the best evidence - if that evidence had showed that homeopathy worked then they would embrace that - but it doesn&#39;t and that&#39;s why they are upset - homeopaths using homeopathy in contexts where it is inappropriate and dangerous - like cancer and vaccination...Colin Jenkinshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00611067380793974254noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4155421424596088152.post-14755204479572860072012-08-21T16:49:31.544+01:002012-08-21T16:49:31.544+01:00Ah, so your sources are Mike &quot;HealthDanger&qu...Ah, so your sources are Mike &quot;HealthDanger&quot; Adams and Mercola. Unfortunately the three links you cite fail to establish your case. The fact that not all vaccinated children are immune is well known, it is unfortunate that the unvaccinated place these children at risk. It is not a coincidence that pertussis cases are on the rise following several years of assiduous propaganda by the anti-vaccination camp, and by reinforcing their message you are placing people in real danger of serious health damage and death. Not terribly responsible.Guyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01796733036727025970noreply@blogger.com